I recently read about the commentary made by Hilary Mantel on Kate Middleton, and I feel that she is a bit too harsh. She seems to be the ultimate acerbic disparaging analyst, but you know, she's no princess herself! Here is the article I found where she rakes Princess Kate over the coals in what was described as "an astonishing and venomous attack on the Duchess of Cambridge."
The Daily Mail sinks to a new low. I mean really, viral marketing?!
Another "stumbler"...
Wouldn't have anything to do with female jealousy would it?
Oh ffs how do you get these stupid pictures to work?
"She said: 'Her eyes are dead and she wears the strained smile of a woman who really wants to tell the painter to bugger off.'"
Which is not such a good strategy as Princess Annes, who has just told the press to bugger off on numerous occasions. Harry comes near to that and William has broken protocol by using privacy laws to sue the press.
If we have to have an hereditary head of state I would rather it was a more low key where they just go about doing their business without any fuss.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ February 19 2013, 8:37 AM GMTWouldn't have anything to do with female jealousy would it?
I mean.
Oh dear Alfred. Do you know any intelligent women?
Quote: youngian @ February 19 2013, 10:22 AM GMTIf we have to have an hereditary head of state I would rather it was a more low key where they just go about doing their business without any fuss.
Agreed, but isn't their main business to pander to an image for publicising English tourist attractions? I am a bit stuck on what the best royal solution is.
I don't see why women think they can be comedians and princesses that's like me wanting to be king and a florist
Quote: AJGO @ February 19 2013, 10:30 AM GMTAgreed, but isn't their main business to pander to an image for publicising English tourist attractions? I am a bit stuck on what the best royal solution is.
The Windsors like the Gramaldis in Monaco are a bit of a Eurotrash Ruritainian monarchy sorrounded by absurd flummery, rather than the concept of being first citizens who serve at the grace of the people (the Queen thinks she is annointed by god, a bizarre concept this side of Saudi Arabia).
The Scandanavian monarchs seem to go about their business without much fuss and most of their off-spring have proper jobs (and not just bogus goodwill ambassadors).
The Windsors could at least send off the children to be Governer-generals of whatever coomonwealth country still wants an hereditary foreigner to be their head of state (for reasons best known to themselves).
Quote: sootyj @ February 19 2013, 10:38 AM GMTI don't see why women think they can be comedians and princesses that's like me wanting to be king and a florist
Last time we let men hold both those positions we ended up with the War of the Roses. Quite a thorny subject.
Quote: youngian @ February 19 2013, 10:42 AM GMTThe Windsors like the Gramaldis in Monaco are a bit of a Eurotrash Ruritainian monarchy sorrounded by absurd flummery, rather than the concept of being first citizens who serve at the grace of the people (the Queen thinks she is annointed by god, a bizarre concept this side of Saudi Arabia).
The Scandanavian monarchs seem to go about their business without much fuss. Most of their off-spring have proper jobs and they could at lease send off the children to be Governer generals to whatever coomonwealth country still wants an hereditary foreigner to be their head of state (for reasons best known to themselves).
Yeah, but how to implement that in this country? I am utterly opposed to monarchy, but since getting rid would, in reality, put us in a position where we had a president as well as a PM, I'm not that comfortable with the idea. At least these lot are mostly window dressing. Imagine having another political position for the f**ktards in power to piss on us from. But then it is completely ludicrous that in this day and age we subscribe to the idea that people are born into superiority over an entire bloody country. I dunno!
The Dail Mail has done everyone a huge service by disseminating Mantel's remarks, which far from being 'venemous' are simple statements of fact. You could add 'William's a fatuous, balding c**t' to avoid charges of sexism.
'personality-free 'shop window mannequin' with a 'plastic smile'
'machine-made' princess, 'designed by committee'.
Royals were 'at the most basic... breeding stock, collections of organs.'
Unfortunately the average person has no idea just how vicious and inhuman the royal family is. Middleton will have had more medicals than Robin Van Persie at man United, before the Royals decided to 'buy' her.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ February 19 2013, 8:37 AM GMTWouldn't have anything to do with female jealousy would it?
One of the most depressing remarks I've ever read on this forum.
Quote: Alfred J Kipper @ February 19 2013, 8:37 AM GMTOh ffs how do you get these stupid pictures to work?
All you quoted was the picture name. The BCG server needs to know where the picture is as well as what it's called, so you need to include a URL as well.
Quote: AJGO @ February 19 2013, 10:50 AM GMTI am utterly opposed to monarchy, but since getting rid would, in reality, put us in a position where we had a president as well as a PM, I'm not that comfortable with the idea. At least these lot are mostly window dressing. Imagine having another political position for the f**ktards in power to piss on us from.
If you've been following the recent attempts to get Prince Charles' lobbying letters to ministers disclosed, you'll be aware that the Royals, far from being a decorative, constitutional monachy are actually directly involved in the running of the country and have everything exactly as they want it.
Their history alone is a good enough reason to get rid of them. If the SS or the Stasi became registered charities and raised funds for good causes and built creches, people wouldn't be happy with it.
The Royals are vicious, self-serving inbred mugs - and while they continue to occupy TV, newspaper and mind time, we can never evolve our country into a meritocracy and true democracy.
I was hoping this thread had some lesbian pics in it, then I saw Hilary Mantel.
Quote: Godot Taxis @ February 19 2013, 11:29 AM GMTIf you've been following the recent attempts to get Prince Charles' lobbying letters to ministers disclosed, you'll be aware that the Royals, far from being a decorative, constitutional monachy are actually directly involved in the running of the country and have everything exactly as they want it.
Their history alone is a good enough reason to get rid of them. If the SS or the Stasi became registered charities and raised funds for good causes and built creches, people wouldn't be happy with it.
The Royals are vicious, self-serving inbred mugs - and while they continue to occupy TV, newspaper and mind time, we can never evolve our country into a meritocracy and true democracy.
Indeed. But I think this
vicious, self-serving inbred mugs
about most of our politicians as well.
Quote: AJGO @ February 19 2013, 11:33 AM GMTIndeed. But I think this about most of our politicians as well.
And people in general, really. Vicious, self serving mugs, that is.
Quote: Nil Putters @ February 19 2013, 11:30 AM GMTI was hoping this thread had some lesbian pics in it, then I saw Hilary Mantel.
>_<
Hilary Mantel only called Kate Middleton a shop mannequin because she actually looks like a hamster with a very strange swollen head herself. But that said,i really wouldn't give a shat if all the royals disintegrated from the face of the earth anyway!!
Cant stand royals,Cant stand big headed writers either!